[Cog]

The current record for a government shutdown is 21 days. We are currently at about two weeks. Questions of this nature can only be answered by a poll with the collective intelligence which inhabits this board.

My best estimate is another two weeks but in no event lasting longer than the end of January. My reasoning is that when those 800,000 federal employees haven't been paid for a month, the drama that is created will force the two sides to make a deal. Already TSA workers are calling off sick instead of reporting to work as they are required to do. This will spread to other agencies.

[evilgenius]

The shut down has already hurt a lot of people. It came at a bad time. A lot of government workers probably had to deny their kids things at Christmas. Those people who were hurt are not going to think that the wall was reason enough.

It does make you wonder if Trump is doing this for his wall? I suspect he is really onto downsizing government. Trump may not be as radical as some when it comes to downsizing the government, but I think he would like a smaller government. So, while he may not be into making it "so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub," he may be into making it cheaper for business.

I said two weeks as well. I don't doubt it could go on longer than that. There is no better way to downsize the government than to get some large number of government employees working for someone else. Do you think they would all come back after a long stretch, like airline employees do when they are laid off? It's a good way to change the political persuasion of government employees as well. All you have to do is set up some sort of barrier to entry for new employees that liberals aren't likely to pass.

[Cog]

I'm not hugely sympathetic to federal workers on this issue. In the private sector we are subject to layoffs and outright firing at any moment. That is with no back pay either. With shutdowns in the past, federal workers receive back pay even if they don't work as essential personnel. I mean seriously, a person can't live without one paycheck before his financial life is over?

[Outcast_Searcher]

My best estimate is another two weeks but in no event lasting longer than the end of January. My reasoning is that when those 800,000 federal employees haven't been paid for a month, the drama that is created will force the two sides to make a deal. Already TSA workers are calling off sick instead of reporting to work as they are required to do. This will spread to other agencies.

True enough. There will no doubt be increasing pressure as time passes. But let's remember that (per various sources I've read over time), the federal employees all DID get paid for past shutdowns -- just after the fact.

To the extent that the federal employees are educated professionals earning good salaries (not poor people) AND they know that federal shutdowns are now, unfortunately, a "thing", being caught out without savings and being "hurt" by a few week shutdown is beyond stupid.

(It reminds me of when I was about 25 and IBM switched from a once a week to twice a month payroll. So there was going to be a gap of a week and a half at one point. You would have thought half the employees were going to starve to DEATH from all the whining. When I pointed out that professional, educated people should have savings, there was lots of outrage, I was hauled into my managers office and formally "counseled" not to say something inappropriate like that again. Sheesh. You'd think half the human race was helpless, mewling newborn kittens for heaven's sake.)

Not that I blame federal employees for being upset at not being paid promptly, or not wanting to work endlessly without being paid of course. I'm just talking about the principle of not living on the edge of economic disaster like the average uneducated person who, perhaps, actually has an excuse -- for people who damn well should know better AND should expect such gaps in pay, given modern US federal govt. politics.

I found some official stats on what proportion of US employers offer severance pay:

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/ ... rends.aspx

[Outcast_Searcher]

I'm not hugely sympathetic to federal workers on this issue. In the private sector we are subject to layoffs and outright firing at any moment. That is with no back pay either. With shutdowns in the past, federal workers receive back pay even if they don't work as essential personnel. I mean seriously, a person can't live without one paycheck before his financial life is over?

I completely agree with your post overall. However, for people with good private sector professional jobs, many, if not most, DO provide some severance pay, even if you're fired (with certain egregious behavior like hitting the boss, theft, etc. excepted). This is a strictly voluntary thing -- generally employers are NOT legally required to do this (I just looked it up).

I was kind of stunned when I learned this, but it's true. Now, if you get fired from Wendy's, etc. for rarely showing up to work, yeah, I can imagine you don't get a nickel more than your hourly pay. Of course, turnover there is much higher than a place like a major corporation offering good careers for hard working professionals.

[Outcast_Searcher]

So, while he may not be into making it "so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub," he may be into making it cheaper for business.

Isn't that pretty much standard GOP fare? Just as expanding government and adding social programs is pretty much standard Democrat fare?

I have no fundamental problem with either approach -- I just want government to be efficient, frugal where possible -- i.e. productive, just like the private sector is forced to be to the extent that they have to survive against competitors.

If we had a solid balanced budget policy so taxpayers actually had to promptly PAY for what government spent -- the size of government would be controlled by the extent to which voters are willing to put up with being taxed, over time. As it is, it's too easy for government to expand to buy various constituents' votes -- a form of corruption.

[Plantagenet]

My friends who work for the feds are ecstatic with the shut down. For them, its just more vacation time. A few are designated as "essential" and come into the office but it doesn't have to be the same ones every day. So the first week some people were "essential" and in office while the rest took extra vacation, and the next week some others will be the "essential ones while the rest take more vacation, and so on.

By swapping off who is essential week by week, it allows the fed employees to swap off taking 1-2-week-long mini-vacations to Hawaii etc.

Cheers!

[Cog]

There remains a problem apart from the federal worker bees. The SNAP program, otherwise known as food stamps, was funded for January but not completely for February. I doubt those who get food stamps will be quite so understanding about the EBT cards not getting fully recharged on February 1st. Now how that plays out and which party would be blamed for it is another matter. I have no doubt the MSM will parade endless "starving" children across our TV screens to enhance our outrage.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/pr ... ll-n955136

Millions of Americans could face going without the benefit that allows them to purchase food if the government shutdown continues into February.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP or food stamps, costs an average of around $4.8 billion per month, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But because of the government shutdown, the program has only $3 billion in emergency reserves for February.

More than 19 million households in the United States receive food stamps, accounting for nearly 39 million people. Each household receives on average $245.28 per month.

But because of the shutdown, USDA has no money to pay for the program in the ensuing months. The agency also had to furlough approximately 95 percent of Food and Nutrition Services, the office that oversees the SNAP program.

The White House and the USDA did not respond to requests for comment about their plans to address the shortfall, but experts say there is cause for concern for the millions potentially impacted.

If the $1.8 billion shortfall for February benefits were spread evenly across the 19 million households that receive SNAP benefits, each would see a cut of about $90 per month for their overall grocery budget, according to Dottie Rosenbaum, a senior fellow at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).

“There’s going to be rioting in the streets when they cut the stamps off,” Powell said. “Get your timber ready.”

[Plantagenet]

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP or food stamps, costs an average of around $4.8 billion per month, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But because of the government shutdown, the program has only $3 billion in emergency reserves for February.

The taxpayer is paying 5 billions dollars a month for FOOD STAMPS and Nancy Pelosi won't spend 5 billion dollars on border security!!!!?????!!!!

For heaven sakes....that is so wrong.

Maybe Trump could trade Pelosi 5 billion for the border wall for 5 billion for one month of food stamps?

[mmasters]

There remains a problem apart from the federal worker bees. The SNAP program, otherwise known as food stamps, was funded for January but not completely for February. I doubt those who get food stamps will be quite so understanding about the EBT cards not getting fully recharged on February 1st. Now how that plays out and which party would be blamed for it is another matter. I have no doubt the MSM will parade endless "starving" children across our TV screens to enhance our outrage.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/pr ... ll-n955136

Millions of Americans could face going without the benefit that allows them to purchase food if the government shutdown continues into February.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP or food stamps, costs an average of around $4.8 billion per month, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But because of the government shutdown, the program has only $3 billion in emergency reserves for February.

More than 19 million households in the United States receive food stamps, accounting for nearly 39 million people. Each household receives on average $245.28 per month.

But because of the shutdown, USDA has no money to pay for the program in the ensuing months. The agency also had to furlough approximately 95 percent of Food and Nutrition Services, the office that oversees the SNAP program.

The White House and the USDA did not respond to requests for comment about their plans to address the shortfall, but experts say there is cause for concern for the millions potentially impacted.

If the $1.8 billion shortfall for February benefits were spread evenly across the 19 million households that receive SNAP benefits, each would see a cut of about $90 per month for their overall grocery budget, according to Dottie Rosenbaum, a senior fellow at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).

“There’s going to be rioting in the streets when they cut the stamps off,” Powell said. “Get your timber ready.”

That should be interesting to see.

[mmasters]

My friends who work for the feds are ecstatic with the shut down. For them, its just more vacation time. A few are designated as "essential" and come into the office but it doesn't have to be the same ones every day. So the first week some people were "essential" and in office while the rest took extra vacation, and the next week some others will be the "essential ones while the rest take more vacation, and so on.

By swapping off who is essential week by week, it allows the fed employees to swap off taking 1-2-week-long mini-vacations to Hawaii etc.

Cheers!

I wouldn't put it past Trump to sign an executive order cancelling the back pay to the federal employees while the government is shut down.

[Cog]

There have been times in the past when the EBT system went down for a day or two. Computer glitches. People get quite enraged about it.

If you want some cheap entertainment you can go to the ebt downdetector site and scroll down to read the comments at the bottom. You can even leave comments to show your sympathy to their plight.

https://downdetector.com/status/snap-ebt

[Tanada]

Honestly I stopped watching MSM news of every flavor about 18 months ago and so far I haven't even noticed the US Shut Down of DOOOOOOM!

Considering the ratings that FOX, CNN, MSNBC and all the rest get I think most Americans are now getting their 'news' from Twitter and FB. Those 'news' sources are entirely subjective choice, you see what you follow and don't see the rest.

What does this mean? Well those who follow left leaning 'news' will be outraged, but so what they have been outraged for decades? those on the right will be enthused but again so what? Its not like public opinion matters unless the people in the government care, and that only happens for about three months right before an election takes place. The next election is 22 months away.

[Cog]

The real effects of the shutdown won't be felt for another two weeks. Then you have a cascade of effects with the IRS, border security, air traffic control, and yes food stamps. None of which affect me personally but will others. My interest is in who folds on the issue of the wall.

[Newfie]

There have been articles about the USCG not getting paid during this shutdown.

What’s interesting is that this is hardly a first for the service. There were 2 or 3 prior times when the USCG paychecks stopped. It was in the 60’s I think. I knew members who were in the service at the time. The local base commanders made deals with the local grocery stores to guarantee their payment and the. They then came up with some kind of base script to servicemen could use.

Backnthen the CG was under the Tresuary Dept and that was the cause. I don’t recall more than that.

[Cog]

Yeah the CG is not part of the military budget which is funded until October. They fall under DHS now which is part of the 25% of government workers not funded.

[Plantagenet]

Now Nancy Pelosi is saying the US protecting its borders is "immoral."

Well....we can't expect Speaker Pelosi to vote for anything "immoral," can we?

Cheers!

[Cog]

I guess it wasn't immoral when Obama flew pallets of cash overseas and delivered it to the Iranians

[Plantagenet]

Pelosi is conflating morality with politics. Its bad enough she is a liar, but does she have to be all self-righteous about it?

Cheers!

[Outcast_Searcher]

The taxpayer is paying 5 billions dollars a month for FOOD STAMPS and Nancy Pelosi won't spend 5 billion dollars on border security!!!!?????!!!!

For heaven sakes....that is so wrong.

Maybe Trump could trade Pelosi 5 billion for the border wall for 5 billion for one month of food stamps?

I really, REALLY disklike Nancy Pelosi, but that's not a reasonable claim. I've heard her, Schumer, etc. discuss the issue. She doesn't want to pay for a physical wall -- that's very different than claiming she's not interested in border security.

I keep thinking a virtual wall, built by denying illegals the ability to work jobs (except where they have temporary visitation permission, like picking certain crops). Some kind of E-Verify system which was accurate, and came with a big penalty hit for employers who ignore it should do much of the trick.

But this doesn't happen, largely because the GOP doesn't WANT it to happen (they want cheap labor for their buddies in business), so of course dems are happy to go along with that.

Building a physical wall will cost lots of money, but won't solve the problem. (20 foot wall loses to 25 foot ladder, tunnel, etc.)